Desmatamento ilegal na região de Castelo dos Sonhos, em Altamira (PA) - FT - FELIPE WERNECK - IBAMA.jpg

European Parliament: sanctions against Brazil

Journalist who presided over the Chamber of Deputies, was rapporteur for the Forest Code and minister in the portfolios of Political Coordination and Institutional Relations; of Sport; Science, Technology and Innovation and Defense.

Aldo Rebelo

Translated by Silvia Benchimol and Ewerton Branco (UFPA / ET-Multi)


Earlier this month, the European Parliament passed a resolution that provides for trade sanctions against Brazil and other countries over deforestation, in a major defeat for our diplomacy.
European importers of soy, coffee, cocoa, meat and other products would have to prove that such products did not come from deforested areas. In such cases, European importers would automatically transfer the burden and cost of controlling imports to Brazilian exporters, with a consequent increase in the prices of local production.

Although the excuse for these sanctions is the climate agenda and the protection of the environment, in fact, this is another chapter in the trade war promoted by European farmers, supported by their MEPs [Members of European Parliament], against competitors from Brazil and from the rest of the world.

It is the ‘concern about global warming’ – as a noble cause – being manipulated as a scarecrow to protect subsidized agriculture increasingly dependent on the help of the treasures of European countries to survive.

The European sanctions are presented in Brazil as a defeat for the current government, which is still true, but it is above all a defeat for Brazil as a nation, as the neocolonial agenda of Western Europe and the United States is not limited in time or space taken by the interim governments and rulers.

Brazil has headed a reaction demanding the expansion of consultation with foreign governments, because, according to a letter delivered to MEPs, the sanctions would harm small farmers in the affected countries.

In addition to Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia, Paraguay, Malaysia, Indonesia, among other agricultural producing countries, signed the letter. These countries consider the measures unilateral, discriminatory and harmful to its people and their interests.
On the eve of the elections in Brazil, the decisions adopted by the European Parliament divided our country and prevented a response worthy of the offense and harm to national interests. Weakened and isolated in the world, the Brazilian government did not find enough allies to prevent the European resolution and the divided country on the brink of the elections did not count on a solid support the opposition to defend national interests, as adversaries feared that this defense would help the opponent in the electoral contest.

The episode demonstrates that the future holds challenges for Brazil that will only be effectively addressed if the country is united around an independent diplomacy in defense of national interests, which is a distant reality considering the scenario that lies ahead. Divided around the identity agenda and the cultural and ideological war, we will be fragile and easy prey for the predators of our riches. Brazil needs unity to protect its natural resources, its commercial interests, its agriculture, its industry and its future. It may be possible to win an election splitting the country, but it is very difficult to govern it afterwards. May the lesson be learned.